Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

How safe is this baptism?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • How safe is this baptism?

    Hi

    I have posted previously re this family. It seems that the correct parents of Thomas Crossley bc 1823 Bury are John and Ann. Ann I have on the 41 census, widow bc1796 Whitefield. I have a possible burial for John for 1836, age 36 St Mary Radcliffe. All his children were baptized there. He was married to Ann at St Mary, Bury.The two youngest children were baptized 1838 and 1841 (18 July). Question - does the father have to be alive for his name to go on baptismal records? The July bapt was after the 41 was taken and Ann was a widow!

    From the burial I have found a baptism for John 1800 on the lancs pr site, parents James and Sarah, both names of which John used for his own children.

    Is it safe to say this is the correct baptism or is this a dead end?

    Any thoughts and advice gratefully received.

    treesa

  • #2
    I have transcribed several baptisms for FreeREG, where the father has been stated as deceased, so yes it is possible. However if the father died in 1836 and the child was born in 1841 then either the death you have is the wrong one or father is someone else!!!
    Last edited by WendyPusey; 24-04-09, 14:36.
    Wendy



    PLEASE SCAN AT 300-600 DPI FOR RESTORATION PURPOSES. THANK YOU!

    Comment


    • #3
      Was the child baptised in July 1841 on the 1841 census and if yes, how old was the child?

      Did the baptism(s) mention the father was dec'd - they usually seem to if that's the case.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by treesa View Post
        The July bapt was after the 41 was taken
        Only about 6 weeks after, as the 1841 census was taken in June. So if the burial you found isn't the right one, John could have died while Ann was expecting this child. Problem is that people don't always die near home, of course.

        Comment


        • #5
          Thanks for pointing out the obvious, which I hadn't thought of!!

          I see know where my thoghts should have gone!

          The only children on the 41 census for which I have bapts will be correct. It is the other ones that aren't on census, and for which I haven't found deaths for which are now suspect. Namely Frank bapt 1835, Elizabeth bapt 1838 and John bapt 1841. Parents John and Ann, so maybe a different set of parents?

          John's baptism in 1841, could mean that he was born several years earlier, but I think he may in fact not be part of this family. I had thought that he may not share the same father as his siblings!

          Comment


          • #6
            And Eli was bapt the same day as Miles, but died so I think he is a true sibling and the last one I can be sure of, bapt 1833. So perhaps the burial for father John can be a possibility?

            Comment


            • #7
              Could you try looking for John who was bap July 1841 on the census (or any of those others) to see if you can spot the "other" family?

              Comment


              • #8
                No, sorry, I'm not sub'd for census at the moment.

                Comment


                • #9
                  but if you post who your looking for, someone here can help.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Thanks for all your help. Should I do a new post or continue here, for help with census'?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Post on here, Treesa - we've started, so we'll finish, lol!

                      OC

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Thanks, wasn't sure what to do!

                        Here is what I have:

                        41 census Ann Crossley bc1796 widow, with children Thomas age 15, Jane age 15 also, Sarah age 12 and Miles age 10.

                        Bapts: James 1820, not on 41 census but old enough to have moved out, no death found.
                        Sarah Ann bapt 1827, d 1827
                        Jane bapt 1824, presumed same one on 41 census.
                        Sarah bapt 1829, on 41 census
                        Miles bapt 1833, on 41 census
                        Eli bapt same day as Miles, d1835
                        Frank bapt 1835 not on census
                        Elizabeth bapt 1838 not on census
                        John bapt 18/7/1841 not on census.

                        All bapt Radcliffe, all with parents John and Ann.

                        Thomas says born Bury on census, he is my direct ancestor. I have him bapt 1822, Radcliffe.

                        Found a marriage for John and Ann in Bury, and a burial for John.

                        Any help much appreciated.

                        regards,

                        treesa

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Hi Treesa,

                          This could be the other family living in Pilkington in 1851

                          Ann H W 47 Pilkington
                          Ann D 18 "
                          Francis S 15 "
                          John S 9 Radcliff
                          Betty D 5 Pilkington
                          Abraham S M 22 Bury
                          Ann D-in-L M 20 Pilkington


                          "Information given in this posting is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk" (unless otherwise stated)
                          Glen

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Thanks very much Glen, this looks like the other family. Is this Ann on the 41? Maybe she was with John and if so his age may help. This has solved the mystery of Frank, John and Betty, so I think the last child of my family was Miles/Eli. I think therefore that the burial for John in 1836 age 36 looks likely to be my man. And from the age given, on the lancs pr site there is a bapt for him 1800.

                            Researching further, checking for burials with father James, it seems that the above John died!!

                            Back to the drawing board.....
                            Last edited by treesa; 25-04-09, 18:34.

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X